5 behavioral biases that trip up remote managers

IN times of uncertainty and seclusion, people seek guidance and stability. In the workplace, they usually turn to their superiors. It can be hard for managers to live up to those expectations, and the task of managing people remotely is one few leaders have been prepared for. It’s harder to grasp the context in which colleagues work and live, as well as the challenges they may face, when you don’t see them regularly. All of this increases the likelihood of misunderstandings and can put additional strain on team relations.

Research in behavioral science has taught us that we tend to simplify complex decisions by using “rules of thumb” and heuristics when we face uncertain situations. While these shortcuts allow us to work efficiently even in the face of complexity, they can quickly become the source of biases and errors in our judgment. These biases are nothing new, but a remote working environment can make us especially susceptible to them.

Here are five of the most important biases leaders should watch out for when working and managing remotely:

Confirmation bias: Offices provided various opportunities to connect and share ideas with colleagues from different teams and functions, and receiving spontaneous feedback was easier. In a distributed working world, the threshold for less formal exchanges and requests is significantly higher, and the need for scheduling yet another call can dissuade us from proactively requesting feedback. When interacting remotely, people are more likely to rely on their own judgment and forgo critical review by others to get a job done. As a result, the danger for confirmation bias — i.e., the self-rewarding ways in which we search for and interpret information that confirms our beliefs — increases. To counter this tendency, force yourself and others to gather critical and discomforting points of view, even if this prolongs the decision-making process. You could even appoint a devil’s advocate tasked with challenging your perspective and testing the strength of your argumentation.

Attribution bias: The sporadic and limited interactions in remote work environments make it difficult to grasp team members’ individual situations. The lack of context in which people operate hinders the interpretation of important signals. Nevertheless, our brains are quick to compensate for missing information and jump to conclusions about other people’s behavior. This is why we’re easily prone to attribution bias — i.e., the ingrained tendency to attribute the behaviors of others to character traits rather than situational influences. Being more mindful about the particular set of circumstances other people might find themselves in, such as a medical condition or personal issue, can make us more considerate and less likely to jump to conclusions.

Groupthink: In meetings with many participants, attention is a scarce resource. Virtual meetings are particularly demanding, as they require us to stare at screens and carefully follow conversations to identify important information while being watched. As a result, employees are often less willing to speak up, voice criticism or question decisions. In such an environment, individual biases can easily distort the decision-making of the entire team and increase the risk for groupthink. The more homogeneous the team and the more draining the virtual meeting experience, the greater the risk of groupthink. For this reason, we recommend you appoint a small and heterogeneous group when the team needs to make an important decision. You can also use remote collaboration tools to encourage critical dialogues in breakout rooms before asking team members to share insights with the whole team. This can create safer spaces where team members feel more comfortable speaking up.

In-group effect: In an online-only environment, it can be more difficult for new colleagues to settle into a team. Physical distance reduces exposure to people, limits opportunities for spontaneous exchanges and diminishes communication across the organization. As a consequence, it can be more difficult for a team to form, bond and cohere. This issue should be taken seriously, as group cohesion is positively related to team performance, and people generally exert more effort for colleagues they care about. Investing in social integration and cross-functional exchange early on can therefore have a great impact on virtual team performance down the line. Plan time for personal and professional check-ins and experiment with creative ways to foster team cohesion.

Peak-end effect: In a virtual context, we have limited ability to gauge the time and effort individuals put into their work. Meetings are almost exclusively convened to discuss results, but rarely provide insight into the effort and methodology used from home. This lack of visibility increases the risk of using isolated recent information to evaluate the performance of team members, a bias often referred to as the peak-end effect. The origin of this powerful misconception lies in our tendency to memorize the most intense moment of an experience as well as its end. It has the potential to quickly, subconsciously and unjustifiably distort team members’ performance evaluations in a significant way. To offset the peak-end effect, managers should plan regular performance evaluations, actively inquire about the path to a specific result and discuss particularly positive and negative performance right away.

A change in context almost always leads to changes in behavior, and consequently also in the ways we work. Leaders are called upon to adapt to the changing situational demands and to provide guidance and stability. In this process, scientific insights about human judgment and decision-making should be taken into account to ensure the most effective team management in situations of increased uncertainty. Assessing and addressing this nonexhaustive checklist of the five key biases can help leaders on their way—not only in remote work environments, but also in their personal lives. As the saying goes, never waste a good crisis. The current one certainly has a lot to offer.